Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File R. 14,175, William Finnie, Va

SERVICE
NUMBER
Va
Finnie, William
R. 14.175
Va. Half-Pay.
CONTENTS

State of Virginia - City of Norfolk To wit:
Know all men by these presents that I, Richard H. Chamberlain, of the said City, administrator of Colonel William Finnie deceased, formerly Quarter Master General in the Virginia State Line during the war of the revolution, do hereby constitute and appoint Peter P. Mayo of the said City, my true and Lawful agent and attorney in fact for me and in my name and stead & behalf, as administrator of the said William Finnie deceased, to ask for, prosecute, and receive, any and all sum or sums of money due to or coming to me as administrator of the said Colonel William Finnie, arising out of, or resulting from, the services of the said William Finnie as an officer in the Virginia State Line during the war of the revolution, whether the said services were rendered in the Capacity of Quarter Master General, or in any other capacity; and whether the said money be due for the Half Pay, or for Commutation, and interest, or for any other cause, by whatsoever name it may be called or known - and it being fully my wish and intention to make this power of attorney as broad and as comprehensive as it is possible to be, so as to cover every demand that I have, or can have, as the administrator of said Colonel William Finnie upon the Government of the United States, or of the State of Virginia, and to authorize the said Peter P. Mayo to receive the same, I do hereby declare that this power of attorney shall be so deemed, construed and taken, as to support and sustain him in any demand that he may

makes in my name, as the administrator of the said Colonel William Finnis deceased.
And I do hereby authorize the said Peter P. Mayo to appoint a substitute to act under him fully, and to every extent, in the premises, and bind myself, by these presents to ratify, confirm, and fully abide by whatever my said attorney, or his substituted attorney, may do or cause to be done in my name in the premises, and especially to grant all receipts or other necessary papers, that he or his substitute may think proper to give -
In witness whereof I hereto set my hand and affix my seal this 27th of February 1850 -
Seale
H. Whitelhurst At: Tunstall
R. H. Chamberlain adm r of Colo. Mr. Finnis deceased
State of Virginia
City of Norfolk to wit:
Be it known that this day the above named Richard H. Chamberlain, who is individually known to me, personally appeared before me

a justice of the peace for the said City & acknowledged the above foregoing power of attorney to be his act and deed, and desired that the same may be certified as such to all persons, whom it doth or may concern - Given under my hand and seal this 28 th day of February A. D. 1850 -
H. C. Whitehead
State of Virginia City of Norfolk court
I John Williams Clerk of the Hastings Court of the City of Norfolk aforesaid in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify that administration of the Estate of William Finney dec d was granted in the said Court on the twenty ninth day of December Eighteen hundred and forty nine to Richard H. Chamberlain who gave bond with security (who justified as to his sufficiency) in the penalty of Ten thousand dollars - that the said grant of administration has not been revoked or annulled by the said Court - nor has administration of the said Estate been granted in the said Court to any other person. And I do further certify that Nathan C. Whitehead Esquire who hath given the above certificate, is now, and was on the day of the date thereof, a justice of the peace in and for the said City, duly appointed and qualified that full faith and credit are due to all his acts as such - and that the signature "N. C. Whitehead" thereto subscribed is in his proper hand writing as I do verily believe. In Testimony whereof I have hereunto annexed the seal of the said Court and subscribed my name this tenth day of April Eighteen hundred and fifty in the 74 th year of the Commonwealth John Williams

State of Virginia } To wit: City of Norfolk } I do hereby authorize, constitute and appoint
Vespasian Ellis, to act as my substitute & in my name and stead, to do and perform all matters & things mentioned in, or referred to, in the foregoing Power of attorney - Witness my hand and seal this twenty third day of May 1851 -
Teste W. G. Whitehead Geo Saunders
P. P. Mayo Seal attorney in fact for Richard H. Chamm bilaine admr. of Col. William Fannie decd.
Power of atty. from Col. Wm Fannie adm.
State of Virginia City of Norfolk Va. } I do hereby authorize and appoint Geo Saunders to act as my substitute in all matters & things mentioned in or referred to in the foregoing power of attorney of my hand & seal this 3rd day of April in the year 1850 -
Witness R. H. Salter
R. H. Salter Seal attorney in fact for R. H. Salter

Mr. 2  Stearns
Dear Sir
State law power of Substitution
"L"

In the matter of the Half Pay due the Representative of Col. William Hinnie under the act of Congress of July 5 th 1832, Vasarian Ellis Esq is author- ized to represent me, to receive said Half pay from the Government of the United States, & to do all legal acts necessary in the premises. Washington, Sep. 27. 1850 - W. S. Segar.

certificate of the time of the death of Col. Wm. Finnie.
See p. 100
72

Virginia
At a Hastings Court continued and held for the City of Norfolk on Wednesday the 27 th day of February 1850.
On the motion of Richard H Chamberlaine administrator of William Finnie deceased formerly Quarter Master General of the Virginia Line, it is ordered to be certified that it appears to the Court by the affidavit of Richard G Broughton one of the Editors of the Norfolk Herald, a newspaper published in the City of Norfolk that the death of the said Colonel William Finnie was announced and published in the Norfolk Herald of Saturday the twentieth day of October in the year Eighteen hundred and four, as having occurred on the preceding Thursday morning - and that he died in the sixty fifth year of his age.
I John Williams Clerk of the Hastings Court of the City of Norfolk aforesaid, in the State of Virginia, do hereby certify that the above copied order, is a true transcript from the records of the said Court. In Testimony whereof I have hereto annexed the seal of the said Court, and subscribed my name this twenty eighth day of February in the year of our Lord One thousand eight hundred and fifty, and of the Commonwealth the seventy fourth.
John Williams co

Order of Court R. H. Chumbe only heir of Co d W. F. Smith

State of Virginia. Norfolk County to wit:
At a Court held for Norfolk
County the 20 th day of December 1820.
The Court certify upon satisfactory evidence that Richard H Chamberlayne is the only heir at law of Col: W m Finnie deceased who was formerly an Officer in the Virginia troops in the War of the Revolution.
I Arthur Emmanuel Clarke of the County Court of Norfolk County in the State of Virginia aforesaid hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy from the records of the said Court.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the said Court this 21 st day of March 1851 in the 75 th year of the Commonwealth.
Arthur Emmanuel C o

Jan'y 11/50
Wm Finnie Chalfrey
p.p. Mayo
Jan 11/50

At a Hustings Court continued and held for the City of Norfolk on the 29 th day of November 1849.
Adm n of the Estate of William Finnie dec d granted to Richard H Chamberlaine who made oath and with Peter P Mayo his security who justified upon oath as to his sufficiency entered into and ack d a bond in the penalty of $10,000 conditioned according to law.
State of Virginia City of Norfolk towit:
I John Williams Clerk of the Hustings Court of the City of Norfolk aforesaid do hereby certify that the above is a true copy from the records of the said Court. In Testimony whereof I have hereunto annexed the seal of the said Court, and subscribed my name this Eighth day of January in the year of our Lord One thousand eight hundred and fifty and of the Commonwealth the twenty fourth John Williams cc

Nº 14173
ACT OF FEBRUARY 14, 1871.
WAR OF 1812.
3110
William Finnie Col & In W. Gen Va
Revolution
REJECTED
Discharged _____, 18
4010
N.Y. Pay _____ Act '32
Received _____, 187
Attorney.

Wm Finnis
Application for Half Pay under act of July 5. 1832.
Presented April 22 nd 1850.
Jos. Segar.
Atto. S.C.
Rejected. See letter 21 Nov. 1850 to J. Segar

Col: Mr. Finner's case. Dr. Mas: general of the State line.
See 10. Vol. Hulings Stat: p. 25. where half pay is promised.
" All  general officers of the Army, & "all Field officers &c

"G"
Wm Garrison
gr mar gub
Sept. 1780
"G"

Richmond Virginia Sep t 14: 1780
Army D r to Colo: William Finnie
For am t of his acct for oats purchased & for sundry disbursements in the Quarter Masters Department. £ 2710 „ 14 „ 6
=
I certify that the foregoing entry is truly copied from the Paper Money Journal of 1780 now in this office
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richmond this 17 th day of July 1850.
Rob t Johnston 1 st Auditor

Wm Lloyd Linnice.
Col: of and of Virginia
H.

THIS IS TO CERTIFY, That it appears from a list in this office of such Officers and Soldiers of the Virginia State — Line as settled their accounts and received certificates for the balance of their Full Pay, according to an act of assembly, passed the November session 1781, directing the Auditors of Public Accounts to settle and adjust the pay and accounts of the said Officers and Soldiers from the 1st January 1777 to 31st December 1781, (see Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 10, p. 462,) that a settlement was made on the eighth day of May 1783 in the name of William Finnie as Quartermaster Gen l and evidence of the indebtedness of the State to him for £ 515 ,, 1 ,, 6 — delivered to himself — but as the original settlements or copies thereof are not to be found in this office, the term of service embraced therein cannot be stated.
Given under my hand at the First Auditor's Office, Richmond, this 17 th day of July — 1850
[No Seal of Office.]
Rev John Houston 1 st Auditor

"H" Mr. Linné
Journal of 1781
"H"

Richmond Virginia January the 31 st 1781.
Army Dr to William Tinnie paid for freight of corn from Surry County. £ 336 „ 6 „
I certify that the foregoing is truly copied from the Journal of 1781 now in this Office. Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richmond this 17 th of July 1850
Ro Johnston 1 st Auditor

Wm "J"  J  Simms
August 1780
Journal:
copy account
" " "
For evidence that

Richmond Virginia August 3 rd 1780
Col: William Finnie D to the Army For sundries sold £ 435,,
Sundry Accts D to Colo: William Finnie Maj: Geo: Slaughter for cash advanced him £ 3000. Army - for am t of disbursements as p Acc this day 80486 = 4.7
I hereby certify that the foregoing is truly copied from the Journal of 1780 now in this Office
Given under my hand Richmond Va this 18 th day of July 1850
R Johnston 1 st S ubt

Col W m Tunney's case
evidence of services as 2 d Master General

2 Wm. Linnie
In my final settlement of his account for subsistence as State of Maryland
Settled 22 d May 1783
4

Wm. Finnie
Richmond Virginia the 22 d May 1783
Sundry Accounts Dr to J A T
Army
Warrant to William Oliver for one years interest on a Cert. N o 287 in part of the balance of his pay as a Captain Lieut of Art y State line £ 3,
Warr: to Will Finnie for do: N o 290 dated this day in full of the balance of his subsistence as a Quarter Master Gen l of this State 6 l 3 s 2 d
=
I certify that the foregoing is truly copied from the Specie Journal of 1783 now in this office.
Given under my hand at the Auditors Office Richmond this 17 th July 1850.
Rev John Randolph J. E. Anderson

"E"
San Francisco
May 1780
In mar qual State line
"E"

Richmond in Virginia May 9 th 1780
"Charles Porterfield
Gov: warrant to William Finnie on acc d as State 2 nd Master Gen l . . . . . £ 5000 "
I hereby certify that the foregoing is truly copied from the paper money Journal of 1780 (page 374) now in this office.
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richmond this 7 th day of September 1850.
Allen W. Morton 1 st Clerk acting in absence of the Auditor. —

6" Colo. Wm. H. Hinnic
Dr. Mass Genl. State line
Copy account Aug to Nov. 1879
"6"

Dr
Col d William Finnie as State Quartermaster
   1779 page     August 29 To Sundries p t Journal 29. £4. 15. 0   Sept r 2 To Ditto Ditto 34. 34. 0. 0   " 6 To Recd Muskets Cartridge paper 31. 0. 0   October 5 To 4 Door Locks 12. 10 0   Novem r 5 To Sundries p t Journal 65 16. 12. 6  
The above is truly copied from Ledger N o 30 Page 45.
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richmond this 14 th day of Sept r 1850 Allan W. Morton 1 st C d acting in the absence of the Auditor.

Printed argument in Furney's case
7

CLAIM OF COL. WM. FINNIE'S ADMINISTRATOR
FOR
Half-pay, under Act July 5th, 1832.
This Claim is for half-pay, as " Quarter Master General of the Virginia State Line ," promised by the act of Virginia Assembly of May 1779, and assumed by Congress in the act of July 5, '32.
The services of Colonel Finnie, are admitted by the late commissioner Edwards, and are undeniable, they being proved by record evidence; but the claim was rejected by Mr. Edwards, on the ground , that it was not provided for, by the act of 5th July, 1832. See his letter. An appeal was taken to the Secretary of the Interior, who, upon the appointment of the present Commissioner, referred the case back for a further investigation.
The present Commissioner suggests some doubts as to the construction of the act of July 5, '32, and also, as to the construction of the act of May, 1779, promising half pay, &c.
The first question to be disposed of is, "whether a " Quarter Master General ," is entitled to half-pay under the act of May, 1779? and the second question is, whether, if so entitled, the case is provided for, in the act of July 5th, 1832?
See 10 Vol. Hening's Statutes at Large, p. 25, for the act of May, 1779, promising half-pay to the officers of the Virginia line, &c., and see the act of Congress of July 5, '32 for the provisions of law, under which the half-pay is claimed from the United States.
1st question. Is a " Quarter Master General " entitled to half-pay from Virginia, under the act of May 1779?
That act reads,
" All general officers of the Army, being Citizens of this Commonwealth, and all field officers, captains and subalterns, com-

" manding, &c., &c., and all chaplains, physicians, surgeons, and surgeons' mates, &c., who shall serve to the end of the war; and "all such officers, who shall become supernumerary, &c., &c., shall "be entitled to half-pay, during life," &c. See 10 Hening, p. 25.
It is maintained by the Claimant, that by this act, the Assembly of Virginia intended, to give half-pay for life, to all the officers of her army, who should perform the required service.
It is suggested by the present Commissioner, that the term " general officers " is a technical expression, meaning only general officers of the line , to wit: the Major Generals, and Brigadier Generals; and at the present time, under the present regulations of the United States Army, it is probably true, that " general officers " are those only , who have lineal rank as generals .
But the Claimant answers this suggestion of the Commissioner by saying, that the present acceptance of the phrase, " general officers " as now applied to the officers of the United States army, has no bearing on the question, because we are searching for the meaning of the framers of the law of 1779, and in doing this, we must ascertain the contemporaneous interpretation of this phrase.
We may also very properly refer to the recorded action of the Assembly, in framing the law, to deduce the meaning of this phrase.
On this latter point, the Claimant refers to the note on page 538 of 1st Leigh's Reports, where it will be seen, that the bill when originally introduced, read thus, viz:
"All general officers, OF THE LINE in the Continental army &c. " which was amended by striking out the words, " of the line, in the Continental army &c. " so as to read " all general officers of the army &c. " and in this shape, the law was enacted.
Now, it seems clear to my mind, that it was thus expressly decided by the Legislature, that there should be no distinction , between the LINE and the STAFF officers, and none between the Continental and State troops. And in further illustration of their purpose, to avoid any such distinction, it will be observed, that the " Chaplains, Physicians, Surgeons, and Surgeons Mates ," who never had any lineal rank or commissions , were provided for, by this act. These officers are, and always were, STAFF , and not lineal officers. And why should the Legislature provide for all lineal officers, and the inferior staff officers, and pretermit, and refuse to provide for, the higher staff officers? There was no reason for this distinction, and hence

the words " of the line " were stricken out, in order to admit all staff officers to the benefits of this law. The recorded action of the Assembly, therefore, in framing the law, of May 1779, forbids the idea, that any distinction, was intended to be made, between the officers of the " line ," and the officers of the " staff ." To a casual reader of the act of May 1779, it may at first seem strange, that it was deemed necessary or proper, to mention in express terms, that " Chaplains, Physicians, Surgeons and Surgeons Mates ," should receive half pay; but this mention, of these particular staff officers , proves beyond all cavil, the general purpose of the Assembly, to provide for all officers of the army . Because , if they had not been named , they would have formed an exception, not being embraced in the previous terms used in the law. Let us analyze the act. The first class provided for, in the act, are " all general officers :" the second class, " all field officers :" the third class, " captains and subalterns ," and the fourth class " Chaplains, Physicians, Surgeons and Surgeons Mates ." Now, who compose the first class? Answer, Major Generals, Brigadier Generals, Adjutant Generals, Paymaster Generals, Quarter Master Generals , and other generals, if any. Who compose the second class? Answer, Colonels, Lieutenant Colonels and Majors . Who compose the third class? Captains, Lieutenants, Ensigns, and Cornets . And the fourth class, are Chaplains, Physicians, Surgeons, and Surgeons Mates . Now here , are ALL the officers of the army provided for, in terms, plain, and sufficiently distinct.
But am I asked, where is the provision under which Adjutants, Paymasters, and Quarter Masters, receive half pay? For, it is undeniable, that all these staff officers, have received half pay, under the act of July 5th 1832 . I answer, by asking the same question, and I do it with emphasis , where is the authority to pay Adjutants, Paymasters, and Quarter Masters , their half pay? The law of May 1779, gives no authority in terms , and I repeat, where is the authority ? By what law, or by what principle of common justice and equity, do you pay a Quarter Master , and deny a Quarter Master General ? Is the inferior officer more worthy, than the superior officer? Was the Quarter Master of a Regiment, more worthy of half pay, than the Quarter Master General of a division? These questions cannot be otherwise answered , than by admitting the superior staff officer, to stand on the same platform of law, and of equity, with the inferior staff officer.

But waiving an answer to my enquiries, by others, I repeat , and will endeavor to show, that the act of 1779, was intended to include the whole range of officers , both lineal and staff . I have shown, that one portion of the inferior staff officers , are expressly embraced by the terms of the act, to wit, Chaplains, Physicians, Surgeons and Surgeons Mates , and I have stated, the undeniable truth, that Adjutants, Paymasters, and Quarter Masters, of regiments, have all received half pay, under the act of 5 July 1832, and I will add, that these last mentioned staff officers, though not named in the act of 1779, have repeatedly obtained their judgments, for their staff half pay, in the court of appeals , from 1791, downwards, to the passage of the act of 5 July 1832. And properly, for they were entitled . So said the courts of Virginia—so said the Legislature of Virginia, and so have the Secretaries said, who have severally administered the act of 5 July 1832. And here let me remark, upon the singular inconsistency , which would be exhibited, if a quarter master general should be denied his half pay, for services as quarter master of the whole State, or of a division of State troops, whilst his inferior and subordinate , in the same department , is allowed half pay, and that too, by construction , and not by the language of the law! The allowance of half pay, to Paymasters, Adjutants, and Quarter Masters of regiments, has been made, by construction of law, and not by the terms , in which the law is written. But the construction was right. By reference to the act of 1779, you will see, that Adjutants, Paymasters, and Quarter Masters are not named , whilst Chaplains, Physicians, Surgeons and Surgeons Mates , are expressly mentioned. Yet all these staff officers have been paid!
Keeping in view, my purpose, of proving, that all officers , both lineal and staff , were intended to be provided for, in the act of 1779, I will state, how and why , Adjutants, Paymasters, and Regimental Quarter Masters, not named in the act of 1779, have been, by construction , allowed half pay.
By a regulation of the Continental Congress, of May 27th 1778, which was adopted by Virginia, in the appointment of State line , as well as Continental officers , it was made indispensable, that Adjutants, Paymasters, and Quarter Masters, of regiments, should be taken from the line of the army : and hence we see, that every one of these grades of staff officers , were lineal officers also. F. Woodson, was Lieutenant, and Adjutant. N. L. Savage, was Cornet and

Adjutant. Windsor Brown, was Captain, and Paymaster. Wm. Cherry, was Captain, and Paymaster. James Harper, was Lieutenant, and Quarter Master. John Rogers, was Captain, and Quarter Master. And so, of many others. They held both lineal and staff appointments, and by construction of the act of 1779, they were considered entitled to their half pay, according to the rate of full pay , which they received, when in service, which full pay , was the aggregate pay, for both their lineal and staff service. So said the courts of Virginia, and the Legislature of Virginia, and so have said the several Secretaries. And here we discover the necessity for the special enumeration of Chaplains, Physicians, Surgeons and Surgeons Mates ; because, not being selected from lineal officers , who were embraced by the terms " field officers, captains, and subalterns ," if they had not been specially enumerated, in the act of 1779, they would not be entitled to half pay for life. The assembly, perfectly well understood , that Adjutants, Paymasters, and Regimental Quarter Masters, must be the same persons, who were either " field officers, captains or subalterns ," and hence, there was no necessity, for specifying these staff grades ; and they equally well knew, that Chaplains, Physicians, Surgeons, and Surgeons Mates, would not be taken from the line , and, in order to provide for them , they must be, and were , specially named.
And here let me ask, whether it be possible, that, when we have in mind, that the assembly, struck out the words " of the line ," from the bill, as originally reported, and when we see, that by the use of the appropriate language, they have provided, for all field officers, captains, subalterns, paymasters, adjutants, and regimental quarter masters , as well as, for chaplains, physicians, surgeons, and surgeons' mates , (can it be possible) the terms, " all general officers " were not intended to embrace the higher or general staff ?
Is there any justice or equity in such a construction? Assuredly not, nor could it have been designed to give lineal officers any emoluments, not awarded to staff officers , for, if such had been the design, there was not only no propriety in it, but the distinction between lineal officers and staff officers was abandoned, in amending the original bill, and striking out the words " of the line ," and it was abandoned, in providing for the inferior staff , such as " chaplains, physicians, surgeons, and surgeons' mates ," and it was repudiated by the Court of Appeals, in giving judgments for staff half-pay , as well as by the Legislature of Virginia, in paying these judgments.

Nor have the Secretaries, by whom the act of 5th July 1832, has been construed and executed, ever hesitated to follow the Judicial and Legislative precedents above referred to.
Is it not obvious then, that the act of May 1779 was framed with a view to give half pay to all officers, whether of the line , or of the staff , who should perform the required service? And is it not undeniable, that all denominations of staff officers, as well as of lineal officers, have received half pay, except only this description of staff generals, now presented?
The cases of Col. William Finnie, and Major George Walls, are the only cases of Quartermaster Generals , that have been presented, and are probably the only cases existing, of this denomination, and hence there is no precedent for the payment of a Quartermaster General .
But, I will endeavor to show, in the sequel, that the case of another staff General , has been decided and allowed, and that the principle on which Finnie's case rests, has been distinctly recognized. That point is postponed for the present.
I am not content with showing (as I have done) by reference to the action of the assembly, that the words " of the line " were stricken from the bill of 1779, upon its passage, and that thus it obviously results, that the officers of the " general staff " are embraced in the term " all general officers ," but I propose to show, that the Assembly used language, which was understood, both by the State and Continental authorities, during the revolution, to embrace the general staff, with the generals in the line. This brings me to an examination of the acts of the Colonial Convention of Virginia, and of the resolves of the Continental Congress.
I refer first , to Vol. 9 Hening's Statutes, page 77, where the following clause is found:
"And be it further enacted, the whole of the nine regiments "(then raised) be under the command of one Major General, two "Brigadier Generals, and that there be one Quarter Master General, "one Adjutant General, and one deputy Adjutant General, and for "the more regular , speedy, and equal appointment of officers, be it "further ordained, that the " general officers " shall be appointed, "by the general Congress, and that the field officers shall be nomi- "nated and appointed, by the general convention of this Colony, and "the Captains and subalterns, by the county and district committees, "&c."—(and see page 79:) "And the Regimental staff are or- "dered to be appointed by the field officers, and Captains of the "regiment."

Now, it cannot escape observation, that this act of the Virginia Convention, created three generals of the line — three staff generals , and the necessary complement of field officers, Captains, and Subalterns, and also Regimental staff officers, and made provision for the appointment of all of said officers. Here let me ask, WHAT power appointed the QuarterMaster General? On whom did the Convention of Virginia, devolve the appointment of the “Quarter Master General?” The power given to Congress, by the act, is, to appoint the “ general officers .” That is the extent of the authority given to Congress. The Convention retained the power, to themselves, to appoint the “ field officers .” The Convention gave the power to the County Committees, to appoint the “ Captains and subalterns ,” and directed the “ Regimental staff ,” to wit: Adjutants, Paymasters, and Quarter Masters, to be appointed by the field officers and captains. Who appointed the general staff officers to wit: “the Quarter Master General, and the deputy Quarter Master,” &c.? Congress made the appointment! By what authority? For be it remembered , the power was only given to Congress, to appoint the “ general officers ,” of these nine Regiments. May I not here ask, whether the exercise of the power, to appoint a “ Quartermaster General ,” under the term “ general officers ” does not prove, beyond all cavil, that the Quartermaster General, was embraced by the term, “ general officers .”
By referring to the Journals of Congress, of June 16th 1775, it will be seen, that Congress had already provided a Quarter Master General, for the grand army, (such is the phrase used,) and had directed “ deputy Quarter Master Generals ,” to be provided, for the separate or detached portions of the army. The ordinance, or act of the Virginia colonial convention, above referred to, raising nine Regiments, and prescribing the mode of officering the same, was passed December 1775, and on the 28th March 1776, (see Journals of Congress) Congress appointed a deputy Quarter Master General, for the southern department, to wit, William Finnie, the same , whom Virginia afterwards appointed the Quarter Master General, of the State. And by reference to the Journals of 26th August 1776, it will be found, that Col. Finnie, was then one of the deputy Quarter Master Generals, of the southern department.
By reference to the Journals of Congress, May 7th 1776, it will be seen, that Congress appointed another deputy Quarter Master General, for the southern department, and located him in North

Carolina. By referring to the Certificate of the appointment of Col. Finnie, (filed with the claim) as Quarter Master General , of the State , it will be seen, that Col. Finnie was acting in Virginia, as deputy Quarter Master General , of the Continental line , on the 6th September 1777. but having few Continental troops then to command, he had offered his services to the State , and they were accepted, and he was appointed, " Quarter Master General ," of the State .
Thus is it conclusively shown, that under the term " general officers ," as used by Virginia , Congress appointed a deputy Quarter Master General , pursuant to the authority, by that very term conferred, in the act of the convention of Virginia , passed December 1775 . Both Virginia and Congress , considered the term, " general officers ," as embracing Quarter Master Generals , at that time.
But I refer to further, and equally conclusive authority, on this point.
On the 16th September 1776, Congress ordered 88 Regiments , (denominated Battalions ) to be raised, and apportioned the same, amongst the several States , according to the fixed ratio; and in the resolve, creating this army, and providing for its organization, the following provision was adopted. See Journals of Congress for September 16th 1776.
"That the appointment of all officers, and filling up vacancies, "(except general officers ) be left to the governments of the several "States;" (and) "that all officers be commissioned by Congress ."
This resolve was adopted on the 16th September 1776, and on the 1st day of October, 1776, Congress elected a Quarter Master General , for the army, and on the 9th January, a deputy Quarter Master General for the department of New York , to be stationed at Ticonderoga , and on the same day, dismissed the " director general " of the hospitals, and on the 10th and 11th April 1777, Congress elected no less than seventeen staff generals , for the several departments of the army, and so continued, under said resolve, to appoint, and dismiss, the staff Generals , as well as Major Generals , and Brigadier Generals , to the end of the war!
Now permit me to ask, what was the meaning of " general officers ," as then understood?
The appointment of " all officers, except general officers ," was given to the States , and Congress under the reservation of the appointment of " general officers " appointed a " Quarter Master

General" within two weeks after that resolve, and subsequently elected seventeen staff generals, in two days, under the same reservation of the appointment of " general officers! "
I respectfully submit, that by the term, or phrase, " all general officers ," as used in the act of May 1779, it was intended to embrace all general staff officers, as well as lineal officers, and that this is proved, not only by the fact, that the assembly struck out the words " of the line ," as is shewn in the note , in 1st vol. Leigh, page 538, but also by the contemporaneous interpretation of the phrase, " general officers ," to which I have referred. And you have seen, in the letter of Gen. Scott, to whom the proper enquiry was propounded, and whose answer is before you, that his construction of the act of May 1779, is in accordance with that, for which I contend, and his opinion is formed, from the act itself, without the aid of this contemporaneous construction, by the Virginia convention, and by the continental Congress, and without any reference to the fact, that the assembly, in enacting the law of 1779, rejected those words (" of the line ") which words only, could restrict the operation of the act to lineal officers.
The claim of Col. Finnie, then, is provided for, in the plain and obvious language, of the law of 1779.
It requires not the aid of construction , to bring it within the operation of that law, but it is included in the comprehensive phrase, " all general officers ."
The question here properly arises, what was the rank and pay , of a Quarter Master General? By reference to the Journals of Congress, of 22d December 1775, it will be seen, that, they were those, of a Colonel of the line . See same Journals, for June 5th 1776. See also a copy of the application of Col. Finnie, November 8th, 1784, for Bounty land, (filed with his claim) in which he states, that he was appointed " State Quarter Master General, with the rank and pay, of a Colonel in the line ." It is not to be supposed, that in 1784, the very year after his service had terminated, and when at the seat of government, where the records were kept, a man of his high character, would be reckless enough to assert, in his Bounty land application, a palpable falsehood, or that the executive of Virginia, would not have contradicted his statement, if it had been untrue.
It may be assumed then, as undeniable, that his statement was

true; and that statement is confirmed by the fact, that such was the rank and pay , of a Quarter Master General, as fixed by Congress, by whose regulations Virginia was governed, having expressly adopted them, as applicable to her State troops. Under these regulations, a Chaplain ranked with a Colonel, a Surgeon ranked with a Lieutenant Colonel, and a Surgeons Mate , ranked with a Captain, of the line. See Journals Congress, 27 May 1777, May 27 '78, and other dates, on this point.
Col. Finnie, also received land in 1784, as of the rank of a Colonel of the line .
But is his case embraced by the provisions of the act of July 5th 1832?
Is not this point settled in the decision of Mr. Secretary McLane, in the case of Dr. McClurg, Surgeon of the State Hospitals? It was definitely adjudicated in that case, that although McClurg, did not belong to either one of the regiments, or corps, enumerated in that act, he came equitably within its provisions, because he was Surgeon of hospitals, common to all of said regiments, and corps, and it was the object and purpose of the act, of 5 July 1832, to discharge the obligations Virginia had assumed, in the act of May 1779, to all her State line officers.
The language of the concluding paragraphs, of the report of the Committee of Congress, by whom the bill was reported, which was passed into a law, 5 July 1832, justifies Mr. McLane's decision, and shows very conclusively , that the object and purpose of the bill, was to relieve Virginia entirely , from the obligations, created by the act of May 1779. Could that purpose be effected, otherwise than by paying all the claims justly arising under said act of May 1779? All the Regiments and Corps, belonging to the State line of Virginia, were enumerated in the act, and although Colonel Finnie, was not Quarter Master General, of either one of said Regiments or Corps, he was Quarter Master General of the whole of them, and his case comes strictly within the decision of Mr. McLane, on this point.
Secretary McLane's opinion, in the case of Surgeon McClurg, definitively settled the question, that an Officer belonging to, or connected with , the regiments or corps, enumerated in the act of 5 July 1832, is entitled to the benefits of said act. Under this decision, rendered in 1833, and which, during eighteen years , has not been dis-

urbed, nor controverted, several claims have been paid, where the services of the officer, were not performed, in any one of the regiments or corps enumerated, but were performed in positions, connecting such officers , with a part, or all of said regiments, or corps. Hence their cases came within the scope of the decision of Mr. McLane. Passing from the decision of Mr McLane, in the case of Doctor McClurg, which established the principle above stated, I desire to refer particularly to a case, resting, not only on the above principle, but settling the principle also , that a General Staff Officer is entitled to half pay, as now claimed by the administrator of Col. William Finnie.
I refer to the case of Doctor Mathew Pope, which was allowed, not only in conformity with the principle settled in the case of Doctor McClurg, but the claim was made , and distinctly admitted , as a director general of the State hospitals of Virginia. Doctor Pope had been , down to 1780, a Surgeon in Marshall's regiment, but when that regiment was ordered to march South, in the winter of 1780-81, he declined going, and another surgeon was appointed in his stead. See the papers filed in his case. The services of Doctor Pope, as Surgeon of Marshall's regiment, thus terminated, and under such circumstances, that he had no claim to be considered a supernumerary, and as such , to be entitled to half pay, because , the half pay to supernumeraries, was only promised, on the express condition , that they should again enter the service if required , and this condition Dr. Pope had violated by his refusal to go South with his regiment. But even had he been supernumerary, he could only have been such, as a Surgeon , and he could not, as Surgeon , have claimed and received, the higher half pay of a director general , which was allowed him.
Doctor Pope was excused from further service, by Col. Marshall, at the time above stated, and his service ended by his own act , and not by the act of his government; and had it not been, that he received some few months afterwards, a new appointment, to wit, the appointment of " director general " of the State hospitals, he would have had no valid claim, to half pay for life. But in the summer of 1781, the Executive of Virginia gave him the appointment last named, and, as "director general" he has been allowed and paid half pay, at the rate , and according to the rank , of a Colonel of the line. Is not this case then precisely in point? A " director general " of hospitals, is certainly a " staff general " and as such , Doctor Pope has been recognized and paid. No distinction can be rightfully drawn,

and I presume none will be attempted, between the case of Doctor Pope, and the case of Col. Finnie. They are in principle, precisely alike.
There is certainly no obligation, nor any authority, in any law existing, to allow half pay, to a " director general " unless it be found in the comprehensive phrase, " all general officers " used in the act of May 1779. I assume then with confidence, that the payment to " director general " Pope, was based upon that phrase, which equally includes a " quarter master general ". I assume, that both the questions which have arisen in the present case, have been adjudicated , by the proper authority. I assume too, that, for the reasons herein before given, and which need not be recapitulated, both these questions have been adjudicated rightly , by Secretary McLane, and his successors, and that these adjudications stand vindicated by a long and uninterrupted acquiescence.
There has been no intimation from Congress, by an explanatory act, that Mr. McLane's construction of the act of 5th July 1832, was erroneous. A committee of one branch of Congress, raised in 1850, for the express purpose of examining into alleged misconstructions of this very act, examined minutely into the history of the administration of the act, and reported against the payment of commutation under it, thus virtually endorsing the construction given to the act, in all other particulars . Mr. McLane's decision therefore, has not only been acquiesced in, but sanctioned, approved, and confirmed.
A passing remark, may here be made, on a position taken by the late Commissioner Edwards, in the case of Major Walls, which equally applies to the case of Col. Finnie.
I refer to the point made by Mr. Edwards, that the Continental Congress, did not provide for the general staff of the "Continental line," in the half-pay and commutation resolutions of 1780, '81 and '83!
It is difficult to perceive, how any right minded man, of ordinary perceptive faculties, could arrive at the conclusion, that the act of the Virginia Assembly of 1779, means the same thing , or should receive the same construction , as a resolve of Congress, of a subsequent date, and couched in totally different, and dissimilar language! It might with equal propriety be maintained, nor would it be any more absurd to contend, that the Bounty Land Laws of Virginia, giving more thousands of acres to her State line officers, than the Continen-

tal Congress gave hundreds to her officers, should be construed so as to correspond with the resolves of the Continental Congress!
It is proper that I should here state, that the late Commissioner did not take the above named position, in the case of Col. Finnie, nor has the present Commissioner taken it, in either case.
In conclusion, I submit, that the administrator of Colonel William Finnie, is entitled to the half pay for life, promised by the act of Virginia, of May 1779, and assumed by Congress in the act of 5th July 1832, and that he should be allowed at the same rate of pay, given to a Colonel of the line, that having been his rank, and which was accorded to the administrator of Mathew Pope, "director general" of the hospitals of Virginia.
Respectfully submitted,
VESPASIAN ELLIS.

tal Congress gave hundreds to her officers, should be construed so as to correspond with the resolves of the Continental Congress!
It is proper that I should here state, that the late Commissioner did not take the above named position, in the case of Col. Finnie, nor has the present Commissioner taken it, in either case.
In conclusion, I submit, that the administrator of Colonel William Finnie, is entitled to the half pay for life, promised by the act of Virginia, of May 1779, and assumed by Congress in the act of 5th July 1832, and that he should be allowed at the same rate of pay, given to a Colonel of the line, that having been his rank, and which was accorded to the administrator of Mathew Pope, "director general" of the hospitals of Virginia.
Respectfully submitted,
VESPASIAN ELLIS.

APPENDIX.
Letter of Major General Winfield Scott, filed with the papers, and referred to, in the argument.
"WASHINGTON, May 21, 1851. "
DEAR SIR: In reply to your note of the 19th instant I am compelled to say, that, a Quarter Master General, an Inspector General, an Adjutant General, a Commissary General, a Surgeon General, an Apothecary General, or a Paymaster General, is not a "general officer," in military parlance, unless the military grade, of Brigadier General, or Major General, be specially given by law, to the designation "Quarter Master General, &c." In our army, we have had at different times Quarter Master Generals, with the rank of Brigadier General, and of Colonel, and during the war of 1812, of both grades at the same time.
Thus, from some day in 1813, to the reduction of the army in 1815, we had a Quarter Master General, with the rank of Brigadier general, (which made him a general officer) and at the same time, under him, seven Quarter Masters General, each with the rank of Colonel, (field officer.) The same thing may be said of the Adjutant General's department, at the same time. (One Adjutant and Inspector General, with the rank of Brigadier General, and eight other Adjutants General, with only the rank of Colonel.) In the same war, the Inspectors General, were all Colonels, and then and long afterwards, we had a Commissary General (of purchases) and we have now, a Paymaster General, without any rank at all.
At this time, the Quarter Master General of the Army, is, ex officio , a Brigadier General of the Army, (a general officer) whereas the Adjutant General, and the Inspectors General, are but field officers, (Colonels.)
The foregoing is the strict technical answer, that would be given, in the English Army, as it is here given for ours.
But it seems evident, that, by the phrase used in the Virginia act, or resolution, quoted by you, to wit, "GENERAL OFFICERS," must be understood, what we should now more accurately express, thus,—GENERAL AND GENERAL STAFF OFFICERS.
I remain, respectfully,
And truly yours,
WINFIELD SCOTT.
Jos. SEGAR, Esq.

Col Wm. Finnie
Dr. Mas. Genl.
State line
5 July 1832
Brief made
V. Ellis atty
Rejected
Oct 1851
Letter to Ruhman

Colo. Wm. P Stinnil.
Application for Half Pay undated July 5. '31
Brief.
1    1 1    1 1 1
X
—

Colo. Wm. P Grinnell.
Application for Half Pay undated July 5 '31
Brief.
1 1 1 1 1 1
X

Case of Colo: W m Finneril
This is a claim to Half Pay under the act 5 July, 1832, of the Representative of Colo. W m Finneril, for his services as Quarter Master General of the State of Virginia, in the War of the Revolution.
The facts of the case are admitted by Colo. Edwards, the Record showing such service, as entitled to Half Pay.
The only question raised by Colo. E. is a legal one: to wit, that a Quarter Master General is, a staff officer and not an officer of the Line, and therefore not entitled to Half Pay. (See Colo: E's letter, accompanying the appeal.)
There is no validity in the objection, for the following reasons:
1. Actual service of a military character in a particular Regiment or Brigade or Division is not necessary to raise a claim to Half Pay. Such is not the Law of the case. The Half Pay act of May 1779 (See Hon. State at Sarge, Vol. 10. P. 25,) provides

that "all general Officers of the Army, and all field officers, captains and Subalterns, commanding in the Battalions of this Commonwealth, or serving in the battalions raised for the immediate defence of this State &c. shall be entitled to Half Pay &c."
There are two classes provided for, first, General officers of the Army , Secondly, Field officers, captains & Subalterns , performing service in special Regiments or battalions . The case seems too plain for doubt, unless it be that a Quarter Master General is not a "general officer of the Army", a position which no one will take.
2. It may be submitted that though a Quarter Master General is not in the line of a particular Battalion, he is an officer of the whole line of the army . He is a general officer , common to the whole army, to each Regiment, Battalion, Division & Army. Such has been the universal military usage. And such, I was or should, have been the decision of

Mr. McSane, while Secretary, tho' I have not yet been furnished with the case. He decided that a general Staff officer is as much an officer of the line as he who performs actual service in a particular Regiment.
3. Even if Colo. Edwards's objection be true, that a general Master General is not intitled because he is a Staff Officer, still Colo. Minnie is intitled to Half Pay, and for this reason; that along with his office as Quarters Master General, he had the rank with the  pay pay of a Colonel of the line. This is one of the admitted facts of the case.
Lastly, the only real question in the case is, was  did Colo. Minnie an officer of the State Line , in contradistinction to the Continental Line . The proof on this point is unequivocal & conclusive. The certificate of the Auditor of Vn, and numerous extracts from the Records, at Richmond, shew, beyond all doubt, that he was a Quarters Master General of the Vn. State Line .
On this Statement of the case, I ask

the Secretary of the Interior to reverse the decision of Mr. Edward, & allow the half pay.
Yrs: S ecy . also for Adm l .

Land Office Certificate.

"Four Warrants issued to William Finnie, three of 2000 acres & one of 666 \frac{2}{3} acres. November 20 th 1784."
The above is an extract from the Records of the Virginia Land Office
Teste,
S. H. Parker Reg. L. Office

Col Wm F. Smith
Gr. Mar. Genl.
State line
Va.
act 5 July 37
20 March 1857
V Ellis letter to Campaign of Pensions

Washington Mar 20/51
To the Gov. of Pensions
Sir,
Refering you to the case of Col. W m Finnie, s adw. for half pay, I desire to file today an affidavit of a highly esteemed gentleman of Norfolk (document A) proving that Col Finnie was a Citizen of Virginia, an indispensable requisite to entitle a " general Officer " under act of May 1779 to half pay. (See 10 Vol Hening's Statute p. 25).
As further I conclude proof both of his rank & services I also refer to 10 Vol Hening page 427 where " the  gr.  master  general " is required to report every three months the condition of his department to the

War office of Virginia. This law bears date May 1781 , and the other record proof filed in the case, establishes his services conclusively from Nov. 1777 continuously to the year 1783. There never was any other State quarter Master General, during the whole of the War, in Virginia.
As to his pay, the rate of pay is governed by that of the Continental Army, by Express Law , so far as regards the State line on land. They are by repeated uniform acts placed on the same footing (as to pay) as the Continental line.
In referring to the Journals of Congress Vol. 1. p 273, it will be seen that a De Marts general ranked as Colonel. See Journals of Congress Vol 1 p 305 where De Marts genl. is allowed $80 per month. See Vol 2 o p 129 where the pay of

a gr mas general is fixed at $1166. per month besides his pay as a Major General. But see Vol 3. p. 735, where the gr. master general's pay is reduced to $1904 per year the ranks with a Major General. This was the last change made, so far as I can find, by Congress.
The question then arises, Is he entitled to half pay at this rate ($1904 per year as full pay) $952 per year half pay? or is he entitled to the pay of a Colonel of Infantry, which was his original rank? The pay of a Col o of Infantry was $75 per month or $900 per year. The half pay would of course be $37.50 per month or $450 per year. I should incline to the opinion that his pay should be that last fixed by Congress to wit the half

of $1904. for you, but as Col. Grinnie in his Land Bounty appli- -cation states himself , that he had the rank & pay of a Colonel in the line, I should accept it at $75 per month full pay or $37.50 per month half pay, leaving the question open for further increase if hereafter thought legal.
Vespasian Ellis Atty

hand writing as I do verily believe. In testimony whereof I have hereto affixed the seal of the said Court, and subscribed my name this third day of December in the year of our Lord One thousand eight hundred and fifty and of the Commonwealth the Seventy Sixth Jno. Williams Clerk
Ms. Col. Com. of Finance Citizenship Ms

State of Virginia 2 City of Norfolk 3 I, William B. Lamb Sergeant of the city of Norfolk aforesaid do hereby certify & make known that I was personally and intimately acquainted with Col. William Fennie, who died in the said City many years ago - and I do further certify and make known upon my own personal knowledge that he was a citizen of the State of Virginia Given under my hand this 3 rd day of December 1850
William B. Lamb
State of Virginia 5 City of Norfolk 3 to wit, This day William B. Lamb Esq. Sergeant of said city who is personally known to me, appeared and made oath that the foregoing certificate signed by him is true Given under my hand and seal this 3 rd day of December 1850! D. G. Whitehead, J.P.

State of Virginia City of Norfolk ss
I John Williams Clerk of the Court of the Corporation of the City of Norfolk in the State of Virginia do hereby certify that Nathan C Whitehead Esquire before whom the within affidavit was made is a justice of the peace in and for the said City, duly appointed and qualified that any justice of the peace of this State is authorized to administer an oath - that full faith and credit are due to all his acts as such and that the signature "N. C. Whitehead" thereto subscribed is in his proper hand writing as I do verily believe. In Testimony whereof I have hereunto affixed the seal of the said Court, and subscribed my name this third day of December in the year of our Lord One thousand eight hundred and fifty and of the Commonwealth the Seventy Sixth
John Williams Clerk

Wm Fannie
filed with papers of Thos Herbert

✓ Ch. Jas. Faulkner April 13. 1830
In reference to the opposition started to the payment of the money to him in the case of Geo. Wall. explain it.
Thomas Ewing Secretary of the Interior W. L. King D. S.

Martinsburg April 13 th 1850
Dear Sir
Your favor of the 11 th inst has just been rec d . What objections may now be started to the payment of this money to me, if due, I cannot anticipate, but if they be the same which were stated here, they are very easily answered.
As it must, to an enquiring mind like yours, seem strange that such strenuous opposition should be made to the payment of the money to me , it is proper, that I should state the real ground of the objection as it can be so briefly done.
1 st The strongest opponent to my receiving this money is Thomas W. Patton . His opposition is easily explained. I am admt with the will annexed. I must distribute the fund according to the will . Now by the will he is entirely cut off of any participation in this fund. He may therefore with great truth say, that I have never paid him any part of that, which has heretofore been rec d , or now will I that which may be hereafter received without a decree of Court.
2 nd The next class of opponents are the descendants of Jacob & George Walls - two of the legatees under the will. Their ancestor on the

8 th of November 1792 conveyed & transferred all their right & interest in those accumulation claims for full & entire consideration to John Kenney of this county whereby he be- presented Sam . I have therefore never recog- nized their claim to any portion of this fund.
3 There remain then three other legatees Samuel Duce , married to Anne Walls now the only surviving child of George Walls (Mogey) - the descendants of Mary Miller & of Samuel Walls Walls.
1. Duce refuses entire confidence in me & desires me to receive the fund
2. Mary Miller admits & distributes in like manner
3. And as to Samuel Walls - I confess I felt some surprise to see the name of Thomas S. Walls, a son of Samuel Walls to their power of attorney. That is explained to me in a letter this evening rec d - Dated at Stephentown Ky. April 6 th 1850 & signed by Thomas S. Walls & J. C. Muncle in which they state
That their power of attorney was procured from them under false pretences - "They regret having given them" & "wish to know in what manner they must act to set things to rights again"
Now from this brief narration, if I am correct in my view of the law of the case & of the rights

of the parties in this estate -
There is not one human being having any real legal interest in the distribution of this fund who is opposed to the payment of the money to me
I would be pleased Sir, if you would direct a copy of this letter to be filed in the office of the Com r of Pensions, with the other papers in the case.
Very truly
Yours
Thos. F. Foulke
P.S. If these gentlemen instead of pursuing the course which they are now doing, (if they have any confidence in the rights of their clients) would file a bill for the construction of the will or to test the validity of the conveyances of 1792 it would strike me as a proceeding far better calculated to advance the true interests of those whom they represent.

11 Case of "D Col. W. Linné.
Synopsis.
Halifax sent 5 July 1832

Washington Nov. 15 th 1850
To the Secy. of Pensions,
Sir, I herewith present the case of the admr. of Col: William Ginnie, quarter Master Genl. of the State line of Va. for half pay under act 5 th July 1832. The following papers are filed to wit,
"A". Extract from Journal of the House of Delegates of 8 th Nov. 1784, it being the Statement of Col o . Ginnie himself made at close of the War in his application for Land Bounty, the general law of Va. not embracing a Ft. Master Genl. On this application Land Bounty was granted to
See his statement as to his rank of pay.

him by Virginia, about the same quantity as that given to a Colonel of the continental line for the War.
"B" Extract from the Council General showing him to be in service Nov. 1777.
"6" His account in the fall of 1777 showing him to be then in service.
"D" Copy of his account from July 1779 to Jany 1780, as State gr. mas: general, & showing him to be then in service.
"E" Certificate of a warrant on account as State gr. mas: general, May 9. 1780 and showing him then in the service.

"F" Copy of age dated August 3 rd 1780, showing him still in service.
"G" Copy of age for oats &c &c showing him in service Sept 14 th 1780.
"H" Copy account showing him in service January 1781.
"I" Copy of the settlement of his account for subsistence as 2 nd Mass Genl. of the State, showing his account to be settled to 22 nd May 1783 .
"J" Certificate of auditor of Va. showing that a settlement of his wages was made on the 8 th May 1783 & a balance of $315. 1. 6 due him.

His "subsistence" account however seems to have run on to the 22 d May 1783 the very end of the War.
"I" Power of substitution is my favor.
The power of attorney to Mr. Legan Sprouf of adw n were filed by him some months ago, to which please refer.
Col o William Fennie, was a "General officer", being Quarter Master General , & therefore he is entitled to half pay according to the very words of the act of the Legislature of Virginia of May Session 1779. As he evidently served to the end of

The War, the half pay is only claimed from. 22 d , April 1783, but the question will be reserved, for future consideration, whether he is not entitled to the commutation of five years full pay with the interest thereon, in lieu of the half pay for life. That point is not raised now, for reasons which the department will of course understand & appreciate.
Respectfully Submitted.
Esaias Ellis Attorney.

Ms. A. 9. 2
James D. North Esq. Commissioner of Pensions City of Washington —
Geo. W. Mountfort
1851
26 July

Richmond July 26 1851
Dear Sir,
I received your letter of the 23 d instant and have made the examination for the papers you desire. I have not been able to find the petition of W m Finnie praying for bounty land in 1784. There are two petitions of Col W m Finnie in 1783 stating that he was late Deputy Quarter Master Genl for this State & the United States & that he had been compelled to take receipts from the Continental Creditors & pay to them due bills & praying that the amount due for these bills may be paid &c. Nothing in these however relate to bounty land. The two certificates given by me heretofore are extracts from the journal of the House of Delegates: The Report of the Committee of Propositions & Grievances to which the petition in 1784 was referred is simply that the Committee had according to order had under their consideration several petitions to them referred & come to several resolutions thereupon which were read. There are three resolutions one upon the petition of citizens of Culpeper & Orange, one on the petition of James Rumsey & the other on the petition of W m Finnie the copy of the last being all relating to Finnie I certified. I find that this resolution subsequent

passed the house & the Senate.
With great regard your friend &c George W. Munford
J. S. Heath Esq.

P. 62
Washington Nov. 29/50
Vernon Ellis
In D. document "M" relating to the claim of the representatives of Col. M c Kim of the Revolution & appeals from the decision of the Com t of Pensions in the case.
Ref d to Com t of Pensions for a Report Dep t Interior Nov. 29. 1850

Washington Nov. 29 th 1850
Hon: A.H.H. Stuart Secretary of the Interior.
Sir, On the 21 st Inst, the Commission of pensions rejected the claim of the legal representatives of Colonel William Prince, Quarter Master Genl. of the Stale  line , under act 5 th July 1832.
The claim was filed by myself, under a power of substitution from Mr Logan, My name was endorsed on the envelope, at the request of Mr Edwards, when the claim was filed, in his office, nevertheless, he gave me no intimation of its rejection, but addressed the accompanying letter to Mr Logan, which was only recd. by him yesterday, otherwise an appeal would have been

taken immediately.
Know appeal from the division of W Edwards, and have only to ask a brief inspection of the papers, which will show you, that Col Grinnie was a regular officer of the State line , was settled with as such in 1783, at the close of the War. I refer more especially to document marked "H", filed with the other papers in the case. Indeed every paper in the files, proves that he was in the State line . If W Edwards means by the words " State troops " that Col Grinnie commanded, or acted with, or provided for, a different class of soldiers than those of the Regular State line , I would be

gratified to be informed, what class of soldiers, the State troops consisted of, as contradictory wishes from Soldiers in the line .
Col. Simine read his deprecatory pay this bounty laws , in his petition filed for the latter in 1884 he states, that he was State quarter Master General , with the rank & pay of a colonel in the line , He was seated with or such.
I forbear to make any com- ments on the letter of Col Edwards , as it bears on its face, sufficient evidence of the feelings which prompted his off hand action on the case. Very respectfully your obedt servant P. S. (over)                                       P. S. P. S. P. S.                                       P. S. P. S. P. S. P. S. P. S. P. S.                                       P. S. P. S. P. S.

P.S.
I herewith file document marked "A" adding further evidence to the already overwhelming proof from the records , of his services. V.E.

31 March 1857
Certificate of Secretary of Virginia
No evidence filed upon which said bounty was allowed.

Executive Department Redmond Mar 31 1857
Dear Sir
I confess no evidence in regard to the owner of the Fanny - It appears that he was allowed about 1785 - but the vouchers are not to be found
Very respectfully
Yours faithfully
J. C. McLaughlin
J. C. McLaughlin

Antiquities of
Nov. 18. 1886
Resolution of the H. of D. of V a . allowing the same land formerly to W m Ferriss which was allowed a Continental Colonel in the Continental line.

Executive Department Richmond Va. Apr 2 1887
Sir Enclosed are copies of all that can be found in relation to the arms of Col. Thomas Harp Neeley - Very respectfully Yours
W. D. Richardson
J. A. Heath Esq. Cur. Press

Colo. J. S. Edwards Conn. Pensions Present.
for. Sugar.
22. Am 1850

Washington, April 22. '58
Sir,
I have the honor to present for ad- justment under the Act of July 5. 1832, the claim to half pay of the legal Representatives of Mr. Fitzhugh, a Quarter Master Gen- eral of the State of Virginia.
I have the honor to be,
Very Respectfully,
Yr. H on . Servt. J. W. Segar.
Colo. Edward, Comm d Pension,

Certificate of Auditor of Va in reference to J. M. G. Funnell.
The lines of King W. for Bury Hill was every word of G.

No 6. is herewith, An Account of Disbursements in the Quartermasters Department by William Fleming D.M. at Williamsburg Virginia - since from 1 June 1780 to the 1 st October 1780, is dated Philada 1 October 20 th 1780, and signed William Fleming Late D.M.
Rev Johnston First Auditor
Q.M. Office 31 July 1831

I hereby certify, that there are on file in this office, summary papers, certified by Pat t M c Guire clk Comptrollers office, on the 22 December 1783, to be true copies of the originals which were deposited Nos 1. 2. & 3. in the Treasury, but had been then transmitted to William Dunning Esq r Commissi- oner for adjusting the accounts of the Quarter Master generals department then in New York; and Nos 4. 5. & 6 which were lodged with Col o Charles Pettit, but were then supposed to have been transmitted to the said William Dunning Esq r 8 th N o 1 is headed The Continental Army In acct with William Dunning Deputy Quarter Master General V o and runs from 1 st April 1776. to the 3 rd October 1776. N o 2 is headed - acknowledged in the same manner, and runs. from 3 rd Oct r 1776. to the 17 th July 1777 N o 3 is headed, The United States in account with William Dunning D Q M c G. V o and runs from 11 th Aug t 1777 to the 31 st August 1778 - N o 4. is headed, The Quarter Master General for the United States in account with William Dunning D Q M c G. in the Southern district - and runs from the 24 th Sept 1778 to the 20 th Sept r 1779. N o 5. is headed, An account of Disbursements in the Quarter Masters Department by William Dunning D Q M c G. at Williamsburg Virginia - acknowledged acknowledged and runs from the 27 th April 1779 to the 31 st May 1780, this is dated Philadelphia June 9 1780 and signed Will m Dunning D Q M c G.

No 6. is hereto, An Account of Disbursements in the Quartermasters Department by William Ferriss D.Q.Mt. at Williamsburg Virginia - runs from 1 June 1780 to the 1 st October 1780, is dated Philad a 1 st October 20 th 1780, and signed William Ferriss Late D.Q.Mt. -
Q.M's Office 31 July 1831
Robt Wharton Q.Mt and

"A" Mr. Kinney It was good I have Petition to Legislature. "A"

Extract from the Journal of the House of Delegates of Monday the eighth of November 1784
"A Petition of W m Hinnie was presented to the House and read, setting forth that he was appointed Deputy Quarter Master General by Congress in the Southern Department and also Quarter Master General of this State by the Executive, with the rank and pay of a Colonel in the line, and praying to be allowed the same bounty in land pay & other emolu- ments as are allowed by law to a full Colonel"
x x x
"Ordered that the said petitions be referred to the Committee of Propositions & Grievances that they do examine the matter thereof and report the same with their opinion thereupon to the House."
State of Virginia } City of Richmond } to wit:
I George W. Munford

Clerk of the House of Delegates & Keeper of the Rolls of Virginia do hereby certify that the fore- going is a true extract from the Journal of the House of Delegates of Virginia. Given under my hand this 5 th of Oct r 1850
George W. Munford, C. H. D. & Keeper of the Rolls of V a

In the House of Delegates 10 th of Nov r 1784. Resolved that the petition of William Finnie late Deputy Quarter Master General, praying that he may be allowed the same bounty in Lands as is by law given to a Colonel serving three years in the Continental Army, is reasonable.
Test John Beckley C. H. D.
1784 November 18 th
Agreed to by the Senate
Will. Drew C. S.
a Copy
Test John Beckley C. H. D.
Four Warrants issued to William Finnie, three of 2000 acres one of 666 2 / 3 acres November 20 th 1784.
Copy from the Records of the Virginia Land Office
Test,
S. H. Parker Reg. L. Office.

21. May 1852
Peter P. Mayo
about half pay claim of Lt M Genl Finnie
To
James E. Heath Esq. Commissioner of Pensions.
Washington City.

Norfolk May 21. 1852.
To
James E Heath Esq. Commissioner of Pensions.
Sir,
Last march twelve months ago, Richard H Chamberlaine Esq. asmt of Col. Wm Finnie decd., and myself, called on you at your office in Washington, expecting to receive the Halfpay due for the services of Col Finnie as Master Master General in the Va State Line during the revolutionary war.
Please inform me whether there is any deficiency in the testimony in the case, so that Mr Chamberlaine may have an opportunity of supplying the testimony needed, if he can; or whether there is any informality in the papers showing his authority to receive what is due for Col Finnies services: if the delay in acting upon this case has proceeded from any other cause than those indicated above, please inform Mr Chamberlaine thereof so that he may remove the obstacle whatever it may be.
Y r obt: Servt:
F. P. Mayo

J. Lyons Opinion Mr. Linnie. James L. L.

"all general officers of the army, being citizens of this Commonwealth; and all field officers, captains, and subalterns, commanding, or who shall command, in the battalions of this Commonwealth on continental establishment, or serving in the battalions raised for the immediate defence of this State, or for the defence of the United States; and all chaplains, physicians, surgeons, and surgeon's mates, being citizens of this Commonwealth, and not being in the service of Georgia, or any other State, provided Congress do not make some tantamount provision for them, who shall serve henceforward, or from the time they are commissioned, until the end of the war; and all such officers who have, or shall, become supernumerary on the reduction of any of the said battalions, and shall again enter into the said service, if required so to do, in the same or any higher rank, and continue therein until the end of the war, shall be entitled to half pay during life, to commence from the determination of their command service."
Will Mr. Lyons furnish me with his opinion whether, under the foregoing section of the act of May 1779, with which I know he  you  is familiar, a Quarter Master General is a "general Officer of the Army"?
Very Respectfully Yo. Mag. Ob.
Wm. Segar.
A. Delegates, March 22 nd 1851.
Answer - I do not think there is a doubt that a Quarters Master General is a Genl Officer within the meaning of the act. He will not be might be excluded entirely from the benefit of the act. James Lyons

William Finnie
Worship

affidavits showing time of death & burial of Col.
Wm Finner and that R. H. Chamberlain is a resident of Norfolk

I William N. McTearney, Secretary of Norfolk Lodge No 1 of Free and Accepted Masons, of the City of Norfolk, State of Virginia, do hereby certify that the following is a correct extract from the original records of Norfolk Lodge No 56, which Lodge has ceased to exist, and whose proceedings & records are now in the possession of Norfolk Lodge No 1. So wit.
"At a called Lodge held at the Lodge room on Friday 19 th Octo 1864, A L 5804
Present Rev. Wm Sharp Master
"R. Brough P. Master.
"P. Nestle J. Warden pro tempore
"J. Halladay J. W. p.h.
"P. W. Broom Sec. p.h.
"Robt. Wilson Deu. p.h.
"Wm Atkinson J. Deacon p.h.
"N. Walker J. Deacon
"B. Hathaway Pursuivant
"J. Warrington Siler
"Rev. James Whitehead Master of Lodge No 1 & 15 who numbers & visits. This Lodge was convened for the purpose of paying the last tribute of respect to our dear departed friend and brother C. G. Mr. Finner, and proceeded to his last place of abode, where an appropriate sermon was delivered by our Rev. Bro. Whitehead. The funeral being ended after interment the brethren returned to the Lodge."
Given under my hand this 21 st day of March. Anno Domini 1857
William N. McTearney Secretary of Lodge No 1

State of Virginia
City of Norfolk to wit -
Be it known that this day William N. McKenny, who is personally known to me, personally appeared before me & made oath that the foregoing paper, signed by himself, is a correct extract from the original records of Asaphali Lodge No 56, of Free and accepted Masons - whose proceedings or records are now in possession of Norfolk Lodge No 1, of which he the said William N. McKenny is secretary - Given under my hand this 22 nd day of March 1851 -
A. M. Parker J.P.
City of Norfolk
22 nd March 1851
This day personally appeared before the undersigned, an Alderman of the City aforesaid, R. G. Broughton, who made oath that the following announcement was published in the Norfolk Herald of Saturday October 20 th eighteen hundred and four - viz: -
"On Thursday morning passed out of this life, in the sixty fifth year of his age, Col. Wm. Finnie. His remains were interred with masonic honors yesterday."
Given under my hand this 22 nd day of March 1851
R. G. Broughton
A. M. Parker J.P.

State of Virginia
City of Norfolk to wit -
Be it known that this day Richard G. Broughton, who is known to me to be a citizen and resident of the said City, personally appeared before me and made oath that he is indifferently acquainted with Richard H. Chamberlain, cashier of the office of discount and Deposit of the Farmers Bank of Virginia at Norfolk, and that he the said Richard G. Broughton knows that the said Richard H. Chamberlain resides in the said City of Norfolk Given under my hand this 22 nd day of March 1851 -
N. W. Parker J.P.
Richd Broughton
State of Virginia City of Norfolk re
I John Williams Clerk of the Corporation of the City of Norfolk aforesaid do hereby certify that Nicholas W. Parker Esquire before whom the three preceding affidavits were made is a justice of the peace in and for the said City duly appointed and qualified - that he is authorized to administer oaths - that full faith and credit are due to all his acts as such - and that the three several signatures "N. W. Parker" thereto subscribed are in his proper hand writing as I do verily believe. In testimony whereof I have hereunto annexed the seal of the said Court and subscribed my name this twenty second day of March in the year of our Lord One thousand eight hundred and fifty one and of the Commonwealth the seventy fifth
John Williams Clerk

6 Sept 1777
of James
order of the Executive of Virginia appointing William Finne Dr Master General of the State so long as the militia remained embodied

It appearing from the representation of General Nelson that a Quartermaster General is much wanted at this juncture when so large a body of Militia is called into actual duty; and William Finnie Esquire, Quartermaster General of the Southern Department, having few, or no Continental Troops to attend to at present, offering his services to this state - the Board do advise the Governor to appoint the said William Finnie Esquire to act as Quartermaster General of this State so long as the Militia may remain embodied, or, to him it may appear necessary.
Executive Department
Richmond V o April 2 1857
The above is truly copied from the Journal of the Executive of this State of the 6 th September 1777 H. M. Richards Secy. Com.

D Mrs Jennie
Thomas Guel State line
Copy account July 1779 to Jan'y 1780
"D."

1779. Lt Col. William Pinnie, Quarter Master General " "
  July 31 9 To warrant on the Treasury for L 4 000 0 0   Aug 6 9 To ditto ditto 4 000 0 0   9 9 To ditto ditto 10 000 0 0   10 9 To ditto ditto 10 000 0 0   14 9 To ditto ditto 5 000 0 0   27 9 To ditto ditto 40 000 0 0   Sept 3 9 To ditto ditto 9 000 0 0   7 22 To ditto ditto 10 000 0 0   21 22 To ditto ditto 3 000 0 0   25 22 To ditto ditto 20 000 0 0   28 22 To ditto ditto 6 000 0 0   Octo 8 22 To ditto ditto 3 000 0 0   Nov 26 22 To ditto ditto 25 000 0 0   Dec 17 30 To ditto ditto 50 000 0 0   Jan 7 30 To ditto ditto 50 000 0 0   248 000 0 0 
The above is truly copied from Ledger of the Army N o . 13. page 3 c .
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richmond this 17 th day of Sept r 1850. A.W. Morton 1 c Clerk Acting Auditor

Document "M"
Record hereof of series in 1779 & 1780
June

Williamsburg in Virginia November 27 th 1779
1779
William Finnie Want on Acct as Q ter Master General " 40000, " "
December 13 th
William Finnie Want on Acct as Quarter Master General " 40000, " "
December 18 th
Col o William Finnie Want on Acct as Quarter Master General " 50000, " "
January 7 th 1780
Army Dr to Col o William Finnie Amount of his account of Disbursements " 103.326, 6.8
1780
William Finnie Dr to the Army For sundries sold belonging to the State " 7.666, 5 "
8 th
Col o William Finnie Want on Acct as Quarter Master General " 50000 " "
April 5 th
Army to Col o William Finnie Dr For amount of sundries as p er account " 58888, 11.5 1/2
May 9 th
Charles Porterfield Gov Warrant to William Finnie on acct as State Q ter Master General " 5000 " "
Auditors Office: Richmond 27 th Nov: 1850
I do hereby certify that the above are true copies of extracts from a journal in this office R o Johnston First Audr

Ms. "B" M a Ferriss
City Council Journal
No. 1777
"B"

Thursday November 6 th 1777
At the request of Richard Peters Esquire, Secretary of the War office The Governor gave directions to Colonel William Finnic to send to York town, Pennsylvania the 5000 lbs of Ball in his hands belonging to the Continent - together with a considerable quantity of lead, in the hands of Col: Turner Southall belonging to this State).
Executive Department Richmond Va 19 July 1850
I certify that the foregoing is truly copied from the Council Journal of 1777 now in this Department.
Wm H Redhead Secy Comt

William Ginnie—
Dr. Wm. Ginn

At the request of the Commissioner of Pensions an examina- tion has been made into the services of William Ginnies in the war of the Revolution; half pay being claimed by his administrator for service as Quarter Master General of the State line of Virginia from the 22 April 1783; upon the ground that he continued in service to that time, - and reserving the right to commutation with 6 years interest thereon from that day -
See Journal of Congress of the 28 March 1776, for the follow- ing entry "Resolved that William Ginnies be appointed a deputy quarter master in the Southern department, -
There are on file in the First Auditor's office of Virginia, a series of accounts as follows, Endorse, "No 1 William Ginnies Acct commencing April 2 and ending October 3 1776. Copy" with the following caption "The con- tinental army in and with William Ginnies Deputy Quarter Master General D ty — No 2, William Ginnies Acct commencing October 3 1776, and ending July 17 1777. Copy" with the same caption as No 1 — No 3. Willi- am Ginnies Acct commencing Aug 11 1777, and ending August 31. 1778. Copy" with the following caption "The United States in and with William Ginnies D. 2. M. G. ty No 4. William Ginnies Acct commencing September 24 th 1778, and ending September 20. 1779. Copy" with the following caption "D ty The Quarter Master General for the United States in and with William Ginnies D 2 M. G. for the Southern District" — "No 5 William Gin- nies Acct commencing September 27. 1779, and ending 31 May 1780. Copy" with the following caption "An Acct of Disbursements in the Quarter Masters De-

partment by William Finnie D o M o G. at Williamsburg Virginia" — No 6. William Finnies Acc t Commencing June 1. 1780 and ending October 2 d 1780 — (Copy) with the same caption as No 5 — together with an additional account with the following caption "An account of Disbursements in the Department of the Commissary General of Forage by William Finnie D o M o G. at Willi- amsburg from the 1 st June 1780 to the 2 d of October ensuing. This last account was signed by William Finnie His Reddelfkin 6 October 1780 —
The resolution of Congress of the 28 March 1776, and these accounts show that William Finnie was in Continental Service from that day to the 2 d October 1780 . See Journal of Congress 2 February 1786, for the follow- ing entry — "On a report of the Secretary of war to whom was referred a memorial of William Finnie — Resolved that the position of William Finnie Esq r late a depu- ty Quarter Master General in the Southern Department for the emoluments of a colonel being contrary to the regulations established respecting the subordinate officers in the D o M o Generals department cannot be granted."
On the journal of the Executive Council of Virginia, of the 6 September 1777. the following entry will be found — "It appearing from the representation of General Nelson that a Quarter Master General is much wanted at this juncture when so large a body of Militia is called into actual duty, and William Finnie Esq r Quarter Master General of the Southern Department

having few or no Continental troops to attend to at present, offering his services to this State, the Board do advise the Governor to appoint the said William Dinnie to act as Quarter Master General of this State so long as the Militia may remain embodied or to him it may appear necessary"-
From a variety of entries scattered through the books of the First auditors office of Virginia, there can be little question, that William Dinnie continued to act as Quarter Master General of the State from about the 6 th September 1777 to, as late as the 8 January 1780- the evidence filed and alleged to sustain later service is misapprehended, and fails to do so- In the statement of the case by Mr Ellis, of the 15 November he says-
E. Certificate of a warrant on account as State Q tr Mr General. May 9 th 1780-
H. Copy of account dated Aug 3 1780, showing him still in service-
G. Copy of accounts for oats &c, showing him in service Sept 14. 1780-
K. Copy of account showing him in service January 1781.
I. Copy of the settlement of his account for subsistence as Q tr Mr General of the state, showing his account to be settled to 22 nd May 1783 -
R. Certificate of the Auditor of Virginia showing that a settlement of his wages was made on the 8 th May 1783 and a balance of £ 575-1.6 due him, his subsistence account however seems to have run on to the 22 May 1783 the very end of the war-

Voucher E- is one of the many entries on the old bills of the Auditor's Office, which when taken alone, which are calc- culated to mislead, it was a warrant to William Finnie, for the use of, and charged to, Charles Portarport. Quartermaster General, if William Finnie was the Quartermaster General, the warrant would have been charged to him, as previous warrants have been and not to Portarport-
Vouchers H.G. and H- are simply credits given to him, on those days for disbursements previously made by him, (when not shown) and applied in liquidation of advances made to him prior to the 8 January 1780, as his general account will show-
An examination of Voucher I. will show that it is not a settlement of his acct for subsistence as Dr. Mr. Gov of the State to 22 May 1783- but that it is, for one years interest on a certificate No. 190. issued on that day- The certificate was issued under the act of November Session 1781- for services or subsistence at some time prior to the 1 January 1782, carried interest from that day and as one years interest was due on the 22 nd May 1783, a warrant issued for such interest, at the time of the issue of the Certificate for the principal £102. 13. 9. So also an examination of Voucher K. will show that it was a settlement of the pay and accounts of William Finnie for services at some time prior to the 1. January 1782, under the act of November Session 1781-
If however there was any doubt that this evidence fails to establish service after the 7. January 1780, the following fully establishes such failure-

At an date, 22 December 1779, the following will be found on the journal of the House of delegates of Virginia - "and that no officer in the staff ought to be allowed full pay and rations both in the employment of this state, and of the continent, and that the Governor and council be empowered and directed to take order for carrying this resolution into effect -
Resolved that it is the opinion of the committee that the executive be empowered and directed to make inquiry into the conduct of the several officers in the staff department, of the number of deputies assistants and other dependents employed by them or any of them, and to dismiss such of the said officers not named in the foregoing resolution as it shall appear to them are not immediately necessary, that they regulate the staff of this state upon the Continental model, particularly by filling up the Quarter Masters department by officers of the line -
Resolutions agreed to by the senate 23 December 1779 -
The journal of the Executive Council for this period and some time thereafter has been destroyed, and it is therefore impossible to show what was its action upon the subject, the records of the First Auditor's office, however, show, that on the 7. January 1780, a warrant was issued on account to W m Fannin D r M r Genl, and that after that day the following warrants were issued and char- ged to Col d Charles. Portfield -
1780 Feb 24. Warrant on account as 2 M r Genl £ 10,000 - - - " Mar 7 Warrant on acct as 2 d M r Genl of this state 20,000 - - - " " 14 Warrant on acct as 2 d M r Genl of this state 1,300 - - - " " 25 Warrant on acct as 2 d M r Genl - - - - - 20,000 - - -

1780 Mar 31. Warrant in aid as D r M c Gen l ————— 60 000 — " " Apr 6 War in aid for paying the troops under his command 2 mo. pay ————— 10 000 — " " " 8 Warrant in aid as D r M c G. ————— 1 300 — " " May 5. Warrant in aid as D r M c G. of this state — 2 000 — " " 9 Gov t Warrant to W m Fannin on aid as State D r M c General ————— 5 000 — "
The foregoing entries, and the appointment by the Executive Council of Henry Young, as D r M c Gen l , on the 27 March 1781, in the room of Col d Purdie's death, show conclusively, that Mr. Ellis is mistaken in the de- claration, contained in his letter of 20 March 1831, that the record proof filed in the case establish Fannin's services conclusively to the end of the war from Nov r 1777, continuously to the year 1783, and that there never was any other State D r M c Gen l during the whole of the war in Virginia —
It thus appears, that William Fannin was in the service of the Continent from 28 March 1776, to the 2 d October 1780. That Congress determined that rank in Quarter Masters department did not entitle to emoluments — That within the period of such service he was appoin- ted to act as Quarter Master General for the state of Virginia so long as the Militia might remain em- bodied or to them, (in General) it might appear necessary, that he was at no time an officer of the line, and that between the 7 January and the 24 February 1780, while yet in the continental service, he was substituted by the appointment of Col d Charles. Purdie — showing

that the office of Quarter Master General for the State of Virginia, was not a supernumerary office, - this substitution may have been made in compliance with the resolution of the legislature, or possibly, as it will be seen from Act No. 5. before referred to, running from 27 Septm 1779 to 31 May 1780, that he was Continental Q tr M st stationed at Williamsburg Virginia, and, it is believed that early in the year 1780 the State troops was preparing to, and did march to South Carolina, he may have found the duties of the two offices, incompatible, and resigned.
Official evidence of any fact here stated, if desired, will be obtained and forwarded to the War Department.
Richmond 9 Sept 1832
Joseph Franklin
On the 1 Aug t 1782 a warrant issued to R. Peterfield Esq r of State for Charles Peterfield for pay relative to his act s as Q tr M st Gen l 6 to 10 June 1780 & 354-3-4